Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 12.pdf/628

 Chapters from the Biblical Law. some of yonder red pottage, for I am faint." The Biblical text goes on to explain, " there fore was his name called Edom (the red one)." Jacob, who had probably long been con sidering the question of acquiring Esau's birthright took advantage of the opportunity and said to him, " Sell me this day thy right of first born." From our point of view it would probably have been fairer on Jacob's part to have fed Esau first, and purchased his birthright afterwards, but Jacob seems to have had no scruples about the ethical aspect of the question, nor did Esau at the time see anything wrong in it, although he was afterwards very bitter against Jacob, who had apparently the best of the bargain. Esau's attitude toward his rights as the first born were those of the rough man of the woods. He said, " Behold I am going to die, and what profit then can the right of the first born be to me? " In this answer of Esau may also be seen reflected the atti tude of the earlier stages of society towards the rights established by the newer and later stages. It is the contempt of the barbarian for the products of civilization. The birthright was an intangible thing, and like all incorporeal things could not pass by delivery. Had this sale taken place pub licly before some lawful authority, it would in all probability, have been accompanied by some symbolical act to give it validity. There being no witnesses present, however, recourse was had to the solemnity of the oath for the

589

purpose of binding the bargain. Jacob said to Esau, " Swear fu me this day," and Esau swore unto him, and by this oath, he sold his birthright unto Jacob. The oath, that is to say the invocation of the Higher Powers to attest an act, was the common form of binding transactions in an cient times and has survived as such unto our own days. It is common for men to at test the truth of what they are saying, and to strengthen their promises, by an oath. Anciently, the force and effect of the oath was much greater than it is to-day. The Higher Powers were always the third parties in the transaction, and were presumed to be present and to participate therein. Con tracts were made in the presence of God or in the presence of the household spirits whose immanence was always assumed. A sacri•fice of some sort usually accompanied the conclusion of the contract, or, in the ab sence of such sacrifice, an oath was taken calling upon the ever present Diety to wit ness. The sanction of this oath must have been very great, else it may be presumed that Jacob would have taken precaution to have had witnesses present at this transaction in order to guard against its repudiation by Esau, but the oath was too sacred to be broken, and the fear of divine vengeance was the strongest sanction that the transac tion could have had.